EPS will beat you up if you litter. [Archive] - Beyond.ca - Car Forums

revelations

05-25-2013, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Isaiah
An internal investigation revealed that it was not the whole slice of pizza, just the crust.

The officer believed the suspect to be the Anticrust.

:rofl: win right there

-------

But seriously, again, another video which shows ONLY the aftermath. I'm not saying it was justified but these videos just highlight peoples stupidity at jumping to conclusions based on 50% of a story.

The real story is something probably along the lines of druken idiot throws something at the EPS members and is arrested but refuses cooperation.

But, if he has a legitimate case he can sue in civil court for damages.

CD007

05-25-2013, 03:45 PM

Can't comment, as there isn't enough video.

Only speculation, which is useless.

Modelexis

05-25-2013, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by CD007
Can't comment, as there isn't enough video.
Only speculation, which is useless.

No matter what happened prior to that point or up to that point there is no justification for a group of guys carrying guns to beat a man who is already face down on the ground.

01RedDX

05-25-2013, 10:05 PM

JustGo

05-25-2013, 11:43 PM

Originally posted by Modelexis

No matter what happened prior to that point or up to that point there is no justification for a group of guys carrying guns to beat a man who is already face down on the ground. Are you saying they should have shot him instead? I mean, why else would you even mention they have guns? It's irrelevant.

I don't think they should have shot him, Modelexis. Don't get crazy on us.

Modelexis

05-26-2013, 01:53 AM

The presence of a gun is always relevant.
Especially when the cop is obviously a loose cannon and cannot control his anger, and you don't know what level of firearms training he has.

You don't have to fire a gun to force an unarmed person to submit, the mere presence is enough most times.

It's like saying that the size of the parent is irrelevant when a child is abused by the parent.
If the child was 5x the size of the parent you would have a lot less child abuse and a lot more parents getting shit kicked by their kids fighting back.

The gun does the same thing, it creates an offset power level and gives you the ability to abuse someone your size.

Give civilians the ability to carry loaded guns on their hip and then see how polite police become.

group of guys carrying guns to beat a man
is mirrored by the statement:
child being abused by a parent 5x their size

The size of the parent and the presence of the gun are both relevant in these cases.

Have a heavyweight fighter carrying a gun piss off a female cop with no gun and see how much this female cop abuses this armed heavyweight and his 5 buddies.
Then tell me the presence of a gun is irrelevant to power abuse.

Give inmates guns and take the guns away from the guards and see how fast the power shifts. Even if the inmates don't use their guns they will have complete control over the guards.
Oh, the inmates are abusing the guards, sure they have guns on their hip and the guards do not but that is irrelevant, right?

JustGo

05-26-2013, 12:11 PM

I still don't think they should have shot him, you are clearly a loose cannon yourself.

P. S. I didn't even bother reading what you wrote. I'm sure it didn't make any sense.

Modelexis

05-26-2013, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by JustGo
I still don't think they should have shot him, you are clearly a loose cannon yourself.

P. S. I didn't even bother reading what you wrote. I'm sure it didn't make any sense.

Why would you?, you're just here to troll.

brucebanner

05-26-2013, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
I'm sure the police just tackled the guys, after the pizza missed the bin. No words were exchanged at all. :rolleyes:
There is always more to the story than what's shown. Doesn't look to good when the person recording is stating so and the officer comes at them aggressively though.

Originally posted by JustGo
I still don't think they should have shot him, you are clearly a loose cannon yourself.

P. S. I didn't even bother reading what you wrote. I'm sure it didn't make any sense.
Although Modelexis is showing a drastic viewpoint, I can see the point he is trying to make.

Maxt

05-26-2013, 02:59 PM

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/victim-calls-for-review-of-alleged-assault-1.1232566

This one just came back into the local Okotoks paper.
http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?eid=6c7a9563-ea93-463c-aaa9-b24cc089ab59
Page 14, has more detail than CTV story.

LollerBrader

05-26-2013, 05:42 PM

The police are your friends.

revelations

05-26-2013, 09:43 PM

Modelexis needs to go on a CPS ride-along on a Friday night and see what really happens during a weekend night shift, and then compare to what the media spew out.

JustGo

05-26-2013, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by bruceod

Although Modelexis is showing a drastic viewpoint, I can see the point he is trying to make.
Is he trying to say the police shouldn't have rubbed the guys face in the ground? If that's what he's saying, the fact they have guns is completely irrelevant.

He always resorts to this 'if the police have guns, we should all have guns' nonsense. This situation has nothing to do with guns whatsoever, but he's somehow still trying to work it in there.

If two guys get in a fight, and one has a knife in his pocket, and punches the other guy in the balls,where the hell is the relevance to the knife? The matter at hand is the sack punch. It doesn't even matter what other weapons were in the vicinity. The fact he has a knife doesn't make the punch in the balls more or less excessive.

top_speed

05-26-2013, 09:57 PM

I like how the camera guy says I'm recording, one of the cop get off him immediately and comes after the camera guy. Makes me believe that the cop knew what he was doing is going to get him in trouble.

brucebanner

05-26-2013, 10:08 PM

Keep in mind I don't necessarily agree with his view, just that I think I see where he's trying to go with it. That and I'm aware of what he "resorts" to

I believe he's saying they used excessive force which doesn't seem as it was necessary from the posted video, of course that video does not capture the whole story.

The reference to the gun, is just pointing to the power of having one and the lack of an equal playing field. Why would the person that was throwing the pizza get so out of hand that the officer(s) would have to use such force, when they carry the power, so to speak.

Obviously there are too many factors, I was merely just stating that I think I see where he is coming from, extreme or not.

Orrrrr I could be way out in left field. :D

Modelexis

05-26-2013, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by JustGo
If two guys get in a fight, and one has a knife in his pocket, and punches the other guy in the balls,where the hell is the relevance to the knife? The matter at hand is the sack punch. It doesn't even matter what other weapons were in the vicinity. The fact he has a knife doesn't make the punch in the balls more or less excessive.

Cops don't carry guns concealed, they are openly carrying and they're not carrying California style either, they have one in the chamber.

The point is just that it's that much more cowardly for an abuser to be on such an uneven power playing field than the person he is abusing.

As I said before, a lot of cops would lose the tough guy act if they were not allowed to carry firearms.

Modelexis

05-26-2013, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by revelations
Modelexis needs to go on a CPS ride-along on a Friday night and see what really happens during a weekend night shift, and then compare to what the media spew out.

I was refused a ride along when I asked to participate, they claimed I needed to know someone on the force and that you cannot just book a ride along.

revelations

05-27-2013, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by Modelexis

I was refused a ride along when I asked to participate, they claimed I needed to know someone on the force and that you cannot just book a ride along.

Thats true, they dont just take people off the street - there has to be some kind of quick character reference ability and they also had a no fri/sat night ride along rule for obvious reasons (not sure of the status of this).

I guess youll have to kiss up to justgo or phil and see if they want to take you out to "play" ... haha

gatorade

05-27-2013, 02:26 AM

Originally posted by top_speed
I like how the camera guy says I'm recording, one of the cop get off him immediately and comes after the camera guy. Makes me believe that the cop knew what he was doing is going to get him in trouble.

This, too bad there wasn't more people recording to have a record of the police battering the guy who was recording the police assaulting another guy

GTS4tw

05-27-2013, 06:55 AM

Originally posted by gatorade

This, too bad there wasn't more people recording to have a record of the police battering the guy who was recording the police assaulting another guy

But then they would have to call in backup to assault the second camera guy, and taxpayers would complain about the costs involved.

JustGo

05-27-2013, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by Modelexis

Cops don't carry guns concealed, they are openly carrying and they're not carrying California style either, they have one in the chamber.

The point is just that it's that much more cowardly for an abuser to be on such an uneven power playing field than the person he is abusing.

As I said before, a lot of cops would lose the tough guy act if they were not allowed to carry firearms. You would CERTAINLY have a point if they had their guns pointed at the guy, then as he was giving up, they ran up and started shit kicking him. Your current standpoint, however, is still completely irrelevant. Firstly, nobody who 'misses the garbage can with a piece of pizza' gets taken down to the ground by the cops and placed in handcuffs, or at least not for the simple littering violation. Now, none of us really know the full story here, but I'm guessing guy was being a bit of a douche when the police approached him about the pizza. That being said, being a douche is not punishable by an ass-kicking (though some might argue it ought to be). But what my point here is - and it totally negates your perspective - this fellow obviously wasn't overly concerned that they had guns when he decided to be a douche. If he was already feeling 'intimidated' or 'overpowered', he probably would have just picked up his pizza and apologized. That doesn't appear to have been the case. Therefore, the fact that the police had guns is as irrelevant after the fact as it was before.

GTS4tw

05-27-2013, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by JustGo
You would CERTAINLY have a point if they had their guns pointed at the guy, then as he was giving up, they ran up and started shit kicking him. Your current standpoint, however, is still completely irrelevant. Firstly, nobody who 'misses the garbage can with a piece of pizza' gets taken down to the ground by the cops and placed in handcuffs, or at least not for the simple littering violation. Now, none of us really know the full story here, but I'm guessing guy was being a bit of a douche when the police approached him about the pizza. That being said, being a douche is not punishable by an ass-kicking (though some might argue it ought to be). But what my point here is - and it totally negates your perspective - this fellow obviously wasn't overly concerned that they had guns when he decided to be a douche. If he was already feeling 'intimidated' or 'overpowered', he probably would have just picked up his pizza and apologized. That doesn't appear to have been the case. Therefore, the fact that the police had guns is as irrelevant after the fact as it was before.

The fact that the police have guns is the only reason some of us would comply with their illegal demands. Im not saying they did here, but they do quite frequently and you have to obey and fight it later, which is pretty fierce. That is the point the troll is making, I have him on ignore but the trolls trolling trolls is getting confusing.

FraserB

05-27-2013, 12:03 PM

Originally posted by GTS4tw

... illegal demands.

These would be?

GTS4tw

05-27-2013, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by FraserB

These would be?

I'm not going to go into personal specifics, but there are lots of news stories out there about individual cops abusing their power. I'm not painting them all with that brush though as I have had experience either way. Just saying that when you are in that situation there is only one option, go to jail. The only way to fight it is in court but by then you have had your freedom violated. If you are in the right and fight it at the police level, you will either be going to jail or dying of a gunshot wound. That's it. As long as there is some accountability when power is abused that's all you can do, its in the human spirit to be greedy and a percentage of any occupation is the same. This doesn't help individual victims though.

JustGo

05-27-2013, 12:19 PM

Police having guns is the same as firemen having a hose. It's a tool that makes doing the job easier. Firemen could use buckets of water. It would be more time consuming and less effective, however. It would certainly put them at more risk, having to carry hundreds of buckets of water into a burning building. Not to mention the people dying inside the building waiting for them to put the fire out with buckets.

Police have a gun so when there is a situation where it can be used to effectively resolve a violent, high risk, life or death situation, it's there. Sure, the police could certainly just use their fists, or batons, or whatever other method you'd rather see, (compare to said buckets), however a gun is a more effective tool to resolve those issues with greater efficiency.

Apparently Modelexis believes the police have their guns out, pointing them at everyone all the time. In my entire career, aside from training, my gun has been out maybe 15-20 times, which is an average of 2-3 times a year. I would venture a guess that would be about average... maybe slightly less. It's certainly not the huge issue he seems to think it is. I've certainly never seen a gun used in a coercive manner... That's a quick way to lose your job. If the gun on my hip stops one jackass from trying to suckerpunch me while I'm trying to disperse a noisy party, then I have no problem with it's effectiveness and subconscious effects on people's minds.

FraserB

05-27-2013, 12:41 PM

And if the police having a gun on their belt makes you feel scared or intimidated in any way, then you need help for other issues.

Sugarphreak

05-27-2013, 01:05 PM

...

Modelexis

05-27-2013, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by Sugarphreak

So... are they supposed to free-will them into complying?

In some parts of the UK almost no police are armed.
Interestingly they aren't as hot headed as the cops in the video posted by the OP.
I'm not suggesting cops be disarmed I'm just pointing out that when they display such a tough guy show it's largely in part because they are carrying deadly weapons.

Power is addicting and some people don't mind abusing power from time to time and the truth is that police are just ordinary men with penis' and women with vaginas and they are subject to the same human faults as us all, except they are given extra power and expected to somehow act in opposition to human nature when everyone else cannot be trusted.

FraserB

05-27-2013, 01:34 PM

What's your point?

In a situation where the police have drawn their weapons here, the armed police will be responding the same way in the UK. The only difference is there might be a bit longer response time for the unarmed UK cops to get backup.

Simply having a weapon on their belt is not coercive, is not a threat and is not intimidation.

Modelexis

05-27-2013, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by FraserB
Simply having a weapon on their belt is not coercive, is not a threat and is not intimidation.

It gives the person carrying the weapon a heightened level of power above an unarmed person.
Whether you're threatened by it or not, the fact is they have much more power over you even if they do not choose to use the power.

If a guy with a gun on his hip starts beating you, yes the gun does become a threat at that point, especially if you want to fight back or defend yourself.

FraserB

05-27-2013, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by Modelexis

It gives the person carrying the weapon a heightened level of power above an unarmed person.
Whether you're threatened by it or not, the fact is they have much more power over you even if they do not choose to use the power.

If a guy with a gun on his hip starts beating you, yes the gun does become a threat at that point, especially if you want to fight back or defend yourself.

I think it's fair to say that even without a gun, your average cop is still in a better position of power than Joe Random. Better take away their baton, pepper spray, taser and knife too. You know, to keep the power equal.

Modelexis

05-27-2013, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by FraserB
I think it's fair to say that even without a gun, your average cop is still in a better position of power than Joe Random.

Of course this is true, and I was just trying to make the point that having that heightened level of power is relevant when they're abusing someone with less power.

I'm not trying to make the case that we should disarm police, it was just to illustrate the point that when police have loaded firearms and abuse someone the firearm is relevant to the situation.

Arash Boodagh

05-27-2013, 03:36 PM

I think its obvious police brutality and even worse attacking the guy filming the abuse.
I dont want to debate anyone but Modelexis I'd be interested in hearing your view on why members side with the police in these situations as police abuse and immunity has been continuous.
I understand if you'd rather not go off subject... no need to open another bag of conflict.

Other recent videos

May 26th
Cops Beat Man To Death With Baton
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sp0g_j6mI6g&feature=player_embedded

A few weeks back
David Silva
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2yI0c6CJ7s

Shlade

05-27-2013, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by Modelexis

As I said before, a lot of cops would lose the tough guy act if they were not allowed to carry firearms.

Some yes, others not at all.

You take away their gun they still have a baton and spray.

You take that away they have their hands and their training.

Remember some cops had Security based jobs, Loss Prevention, Bylaw? that had absolutely nothing on their belts aside from a pair of hatch gloves and handcuffs.

But I agree, some cops would lose the tough guy attitude without a gun.

Seth1968

05-27-2013, 04:40 PM

STOP RESISTING!

I'm not. (Punch to the face).

TURN OVER ON YOUR STOMACH!

I can't dumb ass. You're sitting on me.

STOP RESISTING!

jutes

05-27-2013, 05:22 PM

He obviously did something to annoy or aggravate the cop enough to warrant that ass-kicking. Anyone who argues with a cop over something they "think" is right deserves to get slammed into the pavement, more-so if they are resisting arrest. Don't fuck with the long dick of the law. No I am not a cop or in law enforcement.

Modelexis

05-27-2013, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by jutes
He obviously did something to annoy or aggravate the cop enough to warrant that ass-kicking. Anyone who argues with a cop over something they "think" is right deserves to get slammed into the pavement, more-so if they are resisting arrest. Don't fuck with the long dick of the law. No I am not a cop or in law enforcement.

This seems to be a very popular view point and this is very good news for police officers that want to abuse their power and get away with it. The police don't even have to answer to the public since the public scorns anyone who calls into question the force used. I actually think view points like this are more dangerous than the police who abuse their power. You're providing a cover and an excuse for violence to take place at the hands of the people who are duty bound to protect the public.

Viewpoints like yours condemn anyone who questions authority, not really sure how I feel about it but it strikes me as profoundly wrong.

This is not a personal attack at you and I'm glad you gave your honest opinion on the subject, and if majority meant right your viewpoint would be the correct one in that case.

Just a side question, if cops came to your house with no warrant or reason in particular and informed you they suspect you might be involved in illegal activity and will be searching your place of residence.
Would you stand down and welcome them into your house without question? Would you show them around and open up all your locked doors and hand over your computer for inspection?
You would have nothing to hide anyway right?
They would just be doing their jobs making sure crime was not taking place in the area.
I haven't heard of this happening in Canada, but if you would humor me on the situation as a thought experiment.

JustGo

05-27-2013, 10:19 PM

Firstly, they would need a warrant to do that, and warrants aren't handed out all willy-nilly by judges. So if they had a warrant, yes... yes I would let them in to do whatever the warrant says they can do.

Secondly, if I know I'm not guilty of anything, I have nothing to hide, what do I care? I get inconvenienced for an hour or so? Then when they don't find what they're looking for, they leave, I go back to playing Playstation, and I have a great story for my friends.

If they don't have a warrant, I would ask what they are looking for, and if it's reasonable, again I have nothing to hide... Come on in, check it out... You want a coffee or anything?

Are you so antisocial and frightened of anything government that you would slam the door in their face and cry?

Modelexis

05-27-2013, 10:49 PM

Very interesting response.
I don't really know what I would do. If they really want in they will force entry one way or another.

I would probably verbally deny entry and video the interaction so that I would have proof in court that there was an unlawful entry if they ended up trying to lay charges based on their illegal search.

I wouldn't rail against them or load a gun and attempt to defend my property. It's pretty clear where that ends and even if it's the right thing to do sometimes living on your knees is better than dying on your feet.

I guess I feel like if you give the police an inch they will take a mile and rights are either exercised or lost. Allowing the bending or breaking of laws and basic freedoms to me seem like a principally 'slutty' thing to do. It's like the girl who bangs every guy who asks and assumes that every guy has her best interests in mind. It sort of cheapens things for the rest of the women that aren't cum dumpsters.

95EagleAWD

05-28-2013, 12:08 AM

Good thing in 1982 we got the Bill of Rights entrenched into the Constitution so that the police can't just walk into your house without a warrant. +1 for privacy and human rights in Canada.

If the police showed up at my door without a warrant and wanted in, I'd say no. And they'd leave, because of the Charter breach that would take place if they set foot inside my residence. If they really wanted in my house, they'd have a warrant to search it, and they need a reason to get one from a judge.

But in the USA, the Secret Service can do whatever they want without a warrant if they suspect you of something. No warrant needed.

Arash Boodagh

05-28-2013, 12:32 AM

Imagine that corporations encroach so much into Canada that one day we are as destitute as Greece. With big time austerities and an influx of competing immigrants, what if the country is planning to spend many billions on another illegal war and send our soldiers to fight over the oceans into another continent... you only have to look at the G8 protests to see that the police will be the first line of violent enforcers, with impunity, to put people into submission.

95EagleAWD

05-28-2013, 01:21 AM

Originally posted by Arash Boodagh
Imagine that corporations encroach so much into Canada that one day we are as destitute as Greece. With big time austerities and an influx of competing immigrants, what if the country is planning to spend many billions on another illegal war and send our soldiers to fight over the oceans into another continent... you only have to look at the G8 protests to see that the police will be the first line of violent enforcers, with impunity, to put people into submission.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Arash Boodagh

05-28-2013, 02:31 AM

Rather then work on behalf of the people, police are trained and encouraged to violently suppress any unruly citizen... just in the last few week, down south, two people have died in the hands of cops as you can see in the videos I posted in this page... will there be any accountability? no.. the cops in the first video have already been cleared and they even blatantly deleted the main video evidence.
Same thing will be happening here.. look at the Paul Boyd case in B.C., his unnecessary murder was covered up despite the witness accounts, but only a video that resurfaced 5 years after has made the case go back into "investigation". We'll see that no consequences will be given... its free rain to abuse and terrorize the citizens because they are cattle.

JustGo

05-28-2013, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by Arash Boodagh
Rather then work on behalf of the people, police are trained and encouraged to violently suppress any unruly citizen... just in the last few week, down south, two people have died in the hands of cops as you can see in the videos I posted in this page... will there be any accountability? no.. the cops in the first video have already been cleared and they even blatantly deleted the main video evidence.
Same thing will be happening here.. look at the Paul Boyd case in B.C., his unnecessary murder was covered up despite the witness accounts, but only a video that resurfaced 5 years after has made the case go back into "investigation". We'll see that no consequences will be given... its free rain to abuse and terrorize the citizens because they are cattle.
I'm not saying that police brutality is ok, but if you're disturbed about a few cases here, go to Jamaica, South Africa, or Nigeria. Then come back and complain about how bad you have it here with a half dozen cases over several years.

You're absolutely right that it shouldn't happen, but there are always going to be snap shows that take it too far. And thankfully, no matter how bad you try to make it seem, we have it pretty damn good here.

spikerS

05-28-2013, 06:28 AM

Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
Good thing in 1982 we got the Bill of Rights entrenched into the Constitution so that the police can't just walk into your house without a warrant. +1 for privacy and human rights in Canada.

If the police showed up at my door without a warrant and wanted in, I'd say no. And they'd leave, because of the Charter breach that would take place if they set foot inside my residence. If they really wanted in my house, they'd have a warrant to search it, and they need a reason to get one from a judge.

But in the USA, the Secret Service can do whatever they want without a warrant if they suspect you of something. No warrant needed.

The funny thing is, that if you refuse, they use that to get the warrant. Same thing with searching cars. If an officer wants to search your car, and you say no, they can use your denial to get the warrant. it is so fucked up.

For me, i personally don't give a fuck. Freedoms or not, I just don't care. If they want to come search, go nuts. I would rather have a friendly atmosphere than when they come back with a warrant, which they always will, and then it becomes hostile.

But then again, I am not one of those people that always believe the man is out to get me and fuck me over and keep me down. And while I love conspiracy theories, I don't believe them. I also acknowledge that there are fuck ups on the police force that use any excuse to go on a power trip or roid rage. Might as well try and get along with them, than become another violent statistic in the hospital.

Sorry, but I don't care how right I am, I am not going to sit there and argue with the cops and get my ass kicked on principal. I will use the system, because screaming at the cops "fuck YOUUUUUU PIGS!!" while being arrested is going to make them stop and go away.

GTS4tw

05-28-2013, 06:29 AM

Originally posted by JustGo

I'm not saying that police brutality is ok, but if you're disturbed about a few cases here, go to Jamaica, South Africa, or Nigeria. Then come back and complain about how bad you have it here with a half dozen cases over several years.

You're absolutely right that it shouldn't happen, but there are always going to be snap shows that take it too far. And thankfully, no matter how bad you try to make it seem, we have it pretty damn good here.

You name whole countries but then say compare to half a dozen cases over several years. Is that how many you honestly think there are in Canada? If so then I sure understand your viewpoint, you are clearly just uninformed.

Maxt

05-28-2013, 06:48 AM

Originally posted by JustGo

I'm not saying that police brutality is ok, but if you're disturbed about a few cases here, go to Jamaica, South Africa, or Nigeria. Then come back and complain about how bad you have it here with a half dozen cases over several years.

You're absolutely right that it shouldn't happen, but there are always going to be snap shows that take it too far. And thankfully, no matter how bad you try to make it seem, we have it pretty damn good here.
Its all relative.. Compared to some other countries we really don't have it that good here.. Depends on what experiences you have and where you have been.
There is a difference between police service and police force.

Modelexis

05-28-2013, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
Good thing in 1982 we got the Bill of Rights entrenched into the Constitution so that the police can't just walk into your house without a warrant. +1 for privacy and human rights in Canada.

The bill of rights is just a piece of paper with some words on it.
It cannot stop a police officer from violating it in the moment.

Just like any words on paper, you might have a case in court to fight the actions of the officer later on after the act has taken place but in the moment a piece of paper is not going to stop a cop who is performing an illegal action.

If they force entry what are you going to do, run to the printer and print out the bill of rights so that he realizes his mistake and apologizes to you?

95EagleAWD

05-28-2013, 07:40 AM

Originally posted by Modelexis

The bill of rights is just a piece of paper with some words on it.
It cannot stop a police officer from violating it in the moment.

Just like any words on paper, you might have a case in court to fight the actions of the officer later on after the act has taken place but in the moment a piece of paper is not going to stop a cop who is performing an illegal action.

If they force entry what are you going to do, run to the printer and print out the bill of rights so that he realizes his mistake and apologizes to you?

You could say that about any individual who knocks on your door, why single out the Police?

95EagleAWD

05-28-2013, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by Arash Boodagh
Rather then work on behalf of the people, police are trained and encouraged to violently suppress any unruly citizen... just in the last few week, down south, two people have died in the hands of cops as you can see in the videos I posted in this page... will there be any accountability? no.. the cops in the first video have already been cleared and they even blatantly deleted the main video evidence.
Same thing will be happening here.. look at the Paul Boyd case in B.C., his unnecessary murder was covered up despite the witness accounts, but only a video that resurfaced 5 years after has made the case go back into "investigation". We'll see that no consequences will be given... its free rain to abuse and terrorize the citizens because they are cattle.

None of my law enforcement (or military, for that matter) has had anything to do with surpessing any citizen of this country.

Surely the Police never get fired for their misuse of power (http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Edmonton+constable+fired+punching+handcuffed+suspect+then+lying+about/8440221/story.html)

95EagleAWD

05-28-2013, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by spikers

The funny thing is, that if you refuse, they use that to get the warrant. Same thing with searching cars. If an officer wants to search your car, and you say no, they can use your denial to get the warrant. it is so fucked up.

For me, i personally don't give a fuck. Freedoms or not, I just don't care. If they want to come search, go nuts. I would rather have a friendly atmosphere than when they come back with a warrant, which they always will, and then it becomes hostile.

But then again, I am not one of those people that always believe the man is out to get me and fuck me over and keep me down. And while I love conspiracy theories, I don't believe them. I also acknowledge that there are fuck ups on the police force that use any excuse to go on a power trip or roid rage. Might as well try and get along with them, than become another violent statistic in the hospital.

Sorry, but I don't care how right I am, I am not going to sit there and argue with the cops and get my ass kicked on principal. I will use the system, because screaming at the cops "fuck YOUUUUUU PIGS!!" while being arrested is going to make them stop and go away.

They need more reason than your refusal to search a car, let alone a house... Your refusal actually isn't good enough to get a warrant. Search warrants are approved by a judge, and they will 99% of the time need a better reason than "he said no" to grant one.

FraserB

05-28-2013, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by spikers

The funny thing is, that if you refuse, they use that to get the warrant. Same thing with searching cars. If an officer wants to search your car, and you say no, they can use your denial to get the warrant. it is so fucked up.

This is 100% false and you'll never be able to find a case where the justification for a warrant was refusal to search.

GTS4tw

05-28-2013, 07:57 AM

Originally posted by 95EagleAWD

None of my law enforcement (or military, for that matter) has had anything to do with surpessing any citizen of this country.

Surely the Police never get fired for their misuse of power (http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Edmonton+constable+fired+punching+handcuffed+suspect+then+lying+about/8440221/story.html)

What law enforcement agency are you with?

spikerS

05-28-2013, 08:05 AM

Originally posted by 95EagleAWD

They need more reason than your refusal to search a car, let alone a house... Your refusal actually isn't good enough to get a warrant. Search warrants are approved by a judge, and they will 99% of the time need a better reason than "he said no" to grant one.

Originally posted by FraserB

This is 100% false and you'll never be able to find a case where the justification for a warrant was refusal to search.

Not going to go into details about it, but witnessed it first hand, and my experience was not in any way related to the person being searched.

I don't want to get too in depth in public, but I will explain it to you next time I see you Fraser.

Modelexis

05-28-2013, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
You could say that about any individual who knocks on your door, why single out the Police?

Of course it applies to everyone in society, but for some reason it's common for citizens to falsely believe that words on a page can prevent the watchers from doing wrong.

Also, I can legally protect myself with force from a citizen without a badge that is trying to illegally force entry into my place but in the case of police acting illegally you will surely end up dead if you try to resist with force. Even if you stop the initial intrusion of the police with deadly force you will be met with a second wave of police concerned only with the fact that you have killed one of their brothers and you will probably have a few hundred more officers at your door that will not leave until you're dead.
They will not show up and ask the reason for using force against their brother, they will not ask if his initial action was illegal or if you were acting in defense of yourself or your property.

95EagleAWD

05-28-2013, 08:18 AM

Well you can defend yourself from force using proportional force... You can't just shoot someone for breaking into your house.

And yeah, those words on a page do prevent a lot of things from happening.

Modelexis

05-28-2013, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
Well you can defend yourself from force using proportional force... You can't just shoot someone for breaking into your house.

And yeah, those words on a page do prevent a lot of things from happening.

What if the person trying to force entry into my home has a loaded gun?

Surely I should at least be allowed to arm myself with a gun in a holster loaded and ready for action should the illegal activity turn violent.

What would happen if police showed up at your door for an illegal search and you answered the door with a pistol in the ready position, loaded with one in the chamber. Not pointed at them, but in the ready.

http://www.teamspartan.com/STTG_Slideshow_2011/26-READY_PISTOL_POSITION_SUL.jpg

GTS4tw

05-28-2013, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
Well you can defend yourself from force using proportional force... You can't just shoot someone for breaking into your house.

And yeah, those words on a page do prevent a lot of things from happening.

I think you have been lucky enough for this not to have happened to you. That is good, and I wouldnt wish it on you, but it does happen, and has happened to me.

GTS4tw

05-28-2013, 08:34 AM

Originally posted by FraserB

This is 100% false and you'll never be able to find a case where the justification for a warrant was refusal to search.

The justification written on the warrant? Or what really happened?

FraserB

05-28-2013, 08:36 AM

What do you mean by "illegal search"? I assume that it is one you don't happen to agree with? Or do you seriously believe that one day the police will just show up to your house with no warrant and try to push their way in with no reasonable grounds?

FraserB

05-28-2013, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by GTS4tw

The justification written on the warrant? Or what really happened?

To secure a search warrant, the police need to demonstrate that reasonable grounds for that warrant exist. Refusal to search alone does not constitute reasonable grounds.

GTS4tw

05-28-2013, 08:50 AM

Originally posted by FraserB

To secure a search warrant, the police need to demonstrate that reasonable grounds for that warrant exist. Refusal to search alone does not constitute reasonable grounds.

I was raised in a military family, and always around police, and paramedics, I was raised to respect authority and always felt that if someone had problems with the police it was because they deserved it. I had to have it personally proven to me that this was not the case.

JustGo

05-28-2013, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by GTS4tw

You name whole countries but then say compare to half a dozen cases over several years. Is that how many you honestly think there are in Canada? If so then I sure understand your viewpoint, you are clearly just uninformed.

I can assure you I'm not uninformed. How many cases are people killed in Canada for giving the police the stink eye? I know guys that have lived in, and been police officers in those other countries. If your worst day here is a cop being a dick to you when he gives you a ticket, in comparison, that's really nothing. Like I said though, I'm not saying it's right for cops to be douchebags here, but it's like someone complaining about not eating for 4 hours, when there are people around the world who haven't eaten in days. Unless you have personally been attacked unjustly by the police here, which I can guarantee almost none of you have, you're really just making this seem like some sort of epidemic, which it clearly isn't. Of course it happens, but it's certainly not running rampant.

Again, not saying that it never happens here, or that it's cool when it does, but unfortunately that's the nature of the beast as long as we hire humans as police officers. I still think we have it pretty damn good here. I challenge anyone who thinks we don't to visit any of those other countries and commit a simple shoplifting. We'll see how nicely they treat you. Come back here, the police will give you a court date and send you home.

GTS4tw

05-28-2013, 09:13 AM

Originally posted by JustGo

I can assure you I'm not uninformed. How many cases are people killed in Canada for giving the police the stink eye? I know guys that have lived in, and been police officers in those other countries. If your worst day here is a cop being a dick to you when he gives you a ticket, in comparison, that's really nothing. Like I said though, I'm not saying it's right for cops to be douchebags here, but it's like someone complaining about not eating for 4 hours, when there are people around the world who haven't eaten in days. Unless you have personally been attacked unjustly by the police here, which I can guarantee almost none of you have, you're really just making this seem like some sort of epidemic, which it clearly isn't. Of course it happens, but it's certainly not running rampant.

Again, not saying that it never happens here, or that it's cool when it does, but unfortunately that's the nature of the beast as long as we hire humans as police officers. I still think we have it pretty damn good here. I challenge anyone who thinks we don't to visit any of those other countries and commit a simple shoplifting. We'll see how nicely they treat you. Come back here, the police will give you a court date and send you home.

Hard to argue with anything in that post. Its not a huge epidemic, but just like church leaders that prey on children it can paint your whole profession with the same brush. My biggest problem with the system is what happens when you are in the right and try to fight back the right way, you end up getting screwed and never treated the same by police again.

gatorade

05-28-2013, 03:14 PM

I think something you guys should be pointing out is that the system in itself is corrupt. For example in how they deal with accusations of police brutality or misconduct. Right now that is left to police, rather than an independent, civilian or separate organization.

It is illogical to count on the same organization, occupied by the same individuals who are either friends, acquaintances, or co-workers of those who are accused of misconduct. This is exactly why many do not report these incidences to the police, and why many go to the media, or post videos on youtube, because there is no faith in a system that is inherently corrupt.

Modelexis

05-28-2013, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by gatorade
I think something you guys should be pointing out is that the system in itself is corrupt. For example in how they deal with accusations of police brutality or misconduct. Right now that is left to police, rather than an independent, civilian or separate organization.

It is illogical to count on the same organization, occupied by the same individuals who are either friends, acquaintances, or co-workers of those who are accused of misconduct. This is exactly why many do not report these incidences to the police, and why many go to the media, or post videos on youtube, because there is no faith in a system that is inherently corrupt.

CPS and EPS I believe both have an independent review board for serious matters that involve possible criminal actions by police.

ASIRT I think is the acronym.

I followed one case they were involved in, but the problem ended up that they recommended that it was likely that a crime had been committed by an officer but when the recommendation was provided to the crown it was denied and it was never brought to court. The crown proc went against the recommendations of the independent review board.
So even in the cases where it makes it to an independent review board the case can still be dropped because the crown still has final say.

gatorade

05-28-2013, 03:42 PM

ASIRT does not take complaints from the public, rather they are forwarded from the solicitor general, so this doesn't really help the general public, unless they were involved a serious incident, such as a shooting where it would obviously be forwarded.

My argument still stands as ASIRT themselves, state that the public should forward the complaint to the agency in question.

JustGo

05-28-2013, 07:55 PM

https://www.solgps.alberta.ca/boards_commissions/law_enforcement_review_board/Pages/default.aspx

Ta-da!

gatorade

05-28-2013, 08:49 PM

Originally posted by JustGo
https://www.solgps.alberta.ca/boards_commissions/law_enforcement_review_board/Pages/default.aspx

Ta-da!

That actually looks good, too bad nobody knows it exists. I wonder how effective, and how much power they actually yield.

sillysod

05-28-2013, 09:19 PM

Anytime there is a cop thread the same 10 or so users all get fired up and start doing endless laps around Retard park.

JustGo

05-28-2013, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by gatorade

That actually looks good, too bad nobody knows it exists. I wonder how effective, and how much power they actually yield.

That's about as high as it goes in Alberta if that helps.

And it's not like it's a big secret, maybe you should email them and tell them to make some commercials to advertise their existance... :dunno: :D

XXXXXX

05-28-2013, 11:22 PM

I went to the police station today in country hills and stood outside the door until the cop inside acknowledged I was there and then I spit my gum on the window and walked away. Nothing happened so I'm going back tomorrow with pizza crust.

Modelexis

05-28-2013, 11:23 PM

Originally posted by sillysod
Anytime there is a cop thread the same 10 or so users all get fired up and start doing endless laps around Retard park.

Some regular members including myself might get fired up from time to time but no one is dropping personal insults in the form of poorly thought out one-liners due to a lack of content to contribute except for you.

If you can't stand political rants by the same people maybe a local internet forum political area is not the place for you?
What would you expect from such a small forum relative to the rest of the internet and such a small minority who actually post in the political threads?

Maybe you should join some internet forum that specifically leans towards your world view and you will be happy reading exactly what your own world view already is and you will never be bothered with an alternative view that goes against your already made up mind.

Part of the reason I like beyond is that almost no one agrees with me on the political philosophy that I accept, why the hell would I want to discuss politics with people who already share the same philosophy, how boring!

FullFledgedYYC

05-29-2013, 08:50 AM

Originally posted by Modelexis

Part of the reason I like beyond is that almost no one agrees with me on the political philosophy that I accept, why the hell would I want to discuss politics with people who already share the same philosophy, how boring!

Agreed. I like seeing things from another perspective, it actually helps you learn and grow as a person...

gatorade

05-29-2013, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by JustGo

That's about as high as it goes in Alberta if that helps.

And it's not like it's a big secret, maybe you should email them and tell them to make some commercials to advertise their existance... :dunno: :D

Actually it is a secret, can one person on this board state that they have contact that organization?. I for one do not know of one person who has or even knows of its existence, especially individuals who like to report (one specific case I know of where ie. being punched in the head while handcuffed, on the ground and not resisting, while being told not to resist). If people were aware, and confident of an organization, then there would actually be people reporting incidences of police misconduct.

In the current case, where people believe that their only option is to go to the police or the media, most don't even bother, as well illustrated by this board where users complain about experiences with misconduct but never escalate to doing anything.

gatorade

05-29-2013, 03:28 PM

JustGo

05-30-2013, 05:18 AM

Originally posted by gatorade

Actually it is a secret, can one person on this board state that they have contact that organization?. I for one do not know of one person who has or even knows of its existence, especially individuals who like to report (one specific case I know of where ie. being punched in the head while handcuffed, on the ground and not resisting, while being told not to resist). If people were aware, and confident of an organization, then there would actually be people reporting incidences of police misconduct.

In the current case, where people believe that their only option is to go to the police or the media, most don't even bother, as well illustrated by this board where users complain about experiences with misconduct but never escalate to doing anything.
I'm sorry but ignorance is not an excuse. It's right on the government of Alberta website. Like I said, it's not a secret. Obviously some people are able to find it, maybe they are just magic? It's a fairly simple Google search.

I believe it's a secondary process, however, based mostly upon an appeal process.

When it comes to police investigating other police on the initial complaint, I can see why that might make people skeptical, however, the cops that do dumb shit give all cops a bad name. If you think a cop that does something that makes us all look bad is going to get a free pass, it's just not likely. I don't want those guys on the job just as much as you don't. They tarnish everyone.

Think of it this way, imagine you are with your best friend. You go to a party with him and he rapes a 14 year old. You were passed out in the same room. What do you do? Tell him you have his back? Or do you say, hey, you screwed up, you're on your own, don't bring me into this?

And that's for your BEST FRIEND. Police services are fairly large. It's probably less than a 50/50 chance the investigator even KNOWS the 'offending' officer.

FraserB

05-30-2013, 07:27 AM

^ This. And based off of personal experiences with Professional Standards, they do investigate complaints and don't just push them aside.

Gman.45

05-30-2013, 06:46 PM

From earlier in the thread a big deal was made about the police having sidearms, and that was giving them authority over joe blo, as they aren't allowed to carry the same weapons in public.

While that may be true, an interesting fact is how many police officers here in Calgary carry when they are off duty. I'll let you in on a little secret - it's pretty much NONE. I know my old man hated having his on all day, try driving around with that big goofy level 3 retention holster on, plus the extra magazines, it's a literal pain in the ass.

We're lucky we live in a place where having a concealed weapon is pretty much unnecessary. Are there exceptions - of course. However, in your own home, you're free to get a PAL and buy all manner of assault type rifles, shotguns, and handguns in this country, if you're living in fear of being outgunned by the police, laugh out loud. I would say that if anything, the police could be making an argument that joe blo can be far better armed than they are - yet they don't, most police I've spoken with are actually pro gun rights. Making hay about them having a defensive sidearm is a little out there IMO.

I've worked in some awful places doing PSD work, as well as training other forces, including some police units in Jordan with the private military companies I've worked for. I'll tell you this, we are very VERY fortunate here in Canada to have the professional standards that our police keep to in 99.9 percent of most cases. Sure, there is the odd Rob Sidue or Kevin Lockheart, who go bad and are lured in by the huge money offered them by organized crime, but that is a far cry from what other developing or war torn countries go through.

Isaiah

05-31-2013, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Gman.45

We're lucky we live in a place where having a concealed weapon is pretty much unnecessary. Are there exceptions - of course.
Exception: Walking in Nose Hill Park

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/08/08/calgary-nose-hill-gun-stampede-police-us.html

Walt Wawra wrote in a letter to the Calgary Herald editor that he wished he had a gun on a recent trip to Calgary.

The veteran officer said he was on a walk with his wife at Nose Hill Park when they were approached by two "aggressive" men.

“They said to me: ‘Hey, have you been to the Stampede yet?’ And my wife and I both looked at him, and we ignored that first comment,” Wawra said.

“They moved a little closer and they said a little louder: ‘Hey! Have you been to the Stampede yet?’ I believe I said in response: ‘Gentlemen, I don’t have need to talk to you about anything. Goodbye.’”

The man said he felt uncomfortable without his off-duty hand gun, and wrote that "in Canada, only the criminals and the police carry handguns."

FraserB

05-31-2013, 03:34 PM

Yeah, he was a moron haha:nut:

Modelexis

05-31-2013, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by Gman.45
While that may be true, an interesting fact is how many police officers here in Calgary carry when they are off duty. I'll let you in on a little secret - it's pretty much NONE.

Your interesting 'fact' is completely false.

It is illegal for an off duty officer to carry a loaded gun on his person in public.

Standard rules in Canada..........At the end of a shift, the issue hand gun goes into a individual gun locker, at the station, and the officer is "off duty " which means he is "unarmed " and he/she goes home.

A "off duty " Canadian Police officer still HAS powers of arrest, BUT he/she is strongly cautioned to NOT get actively involved, off duty, at risk of being shot by "on duty officers " who may not know him.

He/she SHOULD do exactly what others citizens are asked to do................CALL 911, and give accurate and timely INFORMATION to the call centre, and AFTER the situation is under control, IDENTIFY him/her self to the "on -duty officers " as a witness, even if the officer works for a different Police agency.

The ONLY situation where a "off duty officer " in Canada , may be armed , is IF he /she has been issued a written authorisation by the Chief of his Police agency, to be armed off duty " due to direct personal threats, to the officer ", or his present duties require him/her to be armed at all times . That is a rare event.

ie. your argument is invalid.

Now you should try to answer the question of why we trust a man in a blue costume to carry a loaded firearm in public but when he takes off the costume he is a criminal.
IMO if they can be trusted to carry on duty they can be trusted to carry off duty. The same would go for a retired officer, he/she should be trusted to carry even after he has retired.

While we're on the topic, it is possible for a non-law enforcement citizen to obtain authorization to carry a loaded gun on their person in public if they have been granted by the RCMP.
Rare, but worth mentioning.

GS430

05-31-2013, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by Modelexis

Your interesting 'fact' is completely false.

It is illegal for an off duty officer to carry a loaded gun on his person in public.

ie. your argument is invalid.

Now you should try to answer the question of why we trust a man in a blue costume to carry a loaded firearm in public but when he takes off the costume he is a criminal.
IMO if they can be trusted to carry on duty they can be trusted to carry off duty. The same would go for a retired officer, he/she should be trusted to carry even after he has retired.

.. wut? He said it's pretty much NONE.

Modelexis

05-31-2013, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by GS430
.. wut? He said it's pretty much NONE.

Yes, none and the reason none of them carry is because they would go to jail.
He was making the case that the reason they don't carry is because it's a pain in the ass and they don't choose to. There is no choice in the matter.

This is not a matter of the gun is not comfortable to carry so they don't carry, they will get their shit tossed in prison if they do.

The people society has chosen to carry loaded firearms in public does not trust these people to carry loaded firearms after they're done their shift.

lmao

95EagleAWD

05-31-2013, 04:47 PM

There are officers given permission to carry a gun off duty for various special reasons. But no, normally in Canada, officers do not carry while they're not working.

And I don't think it's a matter of trust. There's simply no reason for an off duty cop to carry a firearm when they're not working. Just like the rest of us.

Isaiah

05-31-2013, 04:59 PM

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r192/Paducahmichael/DearGodmakeitstop.jpg

JustGo

05-31-2013, 06:02 PM

Originally posted by Modelexis

Yes, none and the reason none of them carry is because they would go to jail.
He was making the case that the reason they don't carry is because it's a pain in the ass and they don't choose to. There is no choice in the matter.

This is not a matter of the gun is not comfortable to carry so they don't carry, they will get their shit tossed in prison if they do.

The people society has chosen to carry loaded firearms in public does not trust these people to carry loaded firearms after they're done their shift.

lmao

Sorry to say.... Well, not really, but you're wrong. Definitely not illegal at all.

All I would have to do is get permission from the chief. Nothing illegal about it.